[ExI] Pistorius

Dave Sill sparge at gmail.com
Thu Aug 2 17:31:59 UTC 2012


On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 31 July 2012 20:20, Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com> wrote:
>

>> OK. I think ["natural" is] a useful concept, you disagree.
>>
>
> I maintain that the concept itself is a cultural artifact and can be
> reduced ad absurdum with appropriate examples and thought experiments in
> every circumstance.
>

Eventually, perhaps, but we're not there yet. While it's still useful it
makes sense to use it.

Seriously? How about when a body part that contributes to the performance
>> of a sport is replaced with a man-made replacement?
>>
>
> So, the line would be that you can add, but you cannot remove?
>

No, the line would be that a man-made replacement for a body part is a
prosthetic. I don't know what the rules should be for prosthetics, but
fairness   requires that they not confer an advantage. The rule could be
that runners with prosthetic legs can't compete against runners without
prosthetic legs.


> What about an athlete with a heart transplant?
>

Not a prosthesis, a natural replacement. I don't see a problem with that.


>  What about, more trivially, the replacement of fat mass with lean mass?
>

I don't know...depends upon the mechanism and the source of the lean mass.
I don't have a problem with surgical removal of fat mass.

If I grew new, enhanced legs on an athlete this would be definitely a
> bio.logical process, but how would that be "natural"?
>

I guess it would depend upon *how* you enhanced and grew these legs, but if
they're genetically human they'd be natural in that the biochemical
processes that created and run them are the same as those that occur in
natural human legs.


> I have nothing against the idea of having competitions with specialised
> rules (say, in trot races horses are not allowed to gallop, irrespective of
> which pace would come more "natural" to them).
>
> My point is that they are going to be of the same arbitrary nature of
> those applicable to Formula 1 racing cars, where investigating what is
> "natural" for an engine or a vehicle would seem futile.


 ``"Natural" for an engine'' makes no sense. Cars are completely man-made,
so the rules governing them will have to be somewhat arbitrary.

I have nothing against performance enhancement due to equipment technology,
doping, man-made body parts, etc. I just think that in order for
competition to be fair, dopers have to compete against dopers, biomechs
have to compete against biomechs, etc.

-Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20120802/79547e82/attachment.html>


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list